comparison to Aristotl's demonstration and saying that in Aristotl's way there be insuperablr difficulties which uses to be the saying of those who understand not this Demonstration of Aristotle which is fundamenta to Philosophy and acknowledged by all who deserves the name of Philosophers And so you may see I did well to promise him no demonstrations who know not what they signify but thinks every Anthropomorphitical explication of Scripture to be Demonstrative EIGHTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to his twenty third and twenty fourth Chapters Our Opinion avouch'd by true Philosophy Hiâ— Calumny of our Teâ—ets God's Gâ—… of the Synagogue different from that of the Church The notion of the word Merit The connaturalâ—ess of the pains we put and the needlesness of his The many ill-consequences and absurdities of the Opinion that all Venial affections are blotted out by Contrition in the first Act of Separation The â—illiness of his Opinion that souls in Purgatory cannot help themselves His probable Divinity His non-sâ—… that lyability to be punisht without Fault is 〈◊〉 blem isâ— refuâ—ed 1. I cannot but complain of your Divine that having promised such wonders in the last discussed Chapter he came off so pitifully that where he had the advantage of human apprehension against me he gave me not as much as occasion to explicate my Doctrin unless I should have gone and stray'd from his Text. His oppositions were pure opinions without any sight of Evidence His Authority for the most part of St. Thomas from whom in this point we professedly recede His Scripture such as he himself is bound to solve in respect of Almighty God So that in its words it has no force and all the force must come out of this whether the nature of Angels requires to have the words explicated improperly or no which he may suppose but goes not about to prove otherwise then from uncertain Authority His solutions to admit contradiction or else propose some Argument by halfs The rest of his Chapter high words 2. Howsoever I hope his three and twentieth Chapter will make amends for the question is not so Metaphysical as the other was It begins with an explication of my Doctrin disguis'd in high terms yet true ones for the greatest part In his second Number he accuseth it of being against Philosophy to say that God so order'd all things in the beginning that he need not since put his hand to it By which if he understands that God doth not continue conserving of his creatures it is not my Doctrin If he grants Conservation to God though the truth is that Conservation is but the very Act of first Creation though in name and notion it be divers then I must see how he proves it against Philosophy For saith he no natural cause can produce the soul of a man and therefore God must do some new action when there is an exigence of creating a soul. I grant no creature can create a â—oul but affirm that the first act of Creation creates every soul when time is without farther or greater Influence of God He may reply he understands not this To which my answer is that I beleeve him but cannot help him seeing it is not here place to explicate Mysteries of incident Philosophical points He may help himself if he pleases with my Institutiones both Peripaticae and Sacrâ— He adds two other Philosophical necessities he finds one of the necessity of Gods actual concourse with second causes the other of Gods choosing Individâ—…s for the second causes to produce The former as far as it hath sence in it is done by the Action of Creation or Conservation by which God sets the Angels on work to move celestial Bodies from whose motion actual motion flows into all other causes and this is the true either premotion or concourse of God with creatures plain and visible The other which I fear he means hath no kind of Philosophy nor Divinity in it The choosing of Individâ—… is the rascallest and the ridiculousest Position that ever was affirmed by any scum of Philosophers You see what sound maximes â—e takes to impugn the perfection of God's Wisdom 3. In his fourth Number he begins to employ his Divinity And first he asks what natural cause can raise dead bodies and give them due torments And I must answer with a reply of a question to wit when this is to be done While the Fabrick of Nature holds or when it is ended If when it is ended how comes it to our purpose Or is not he grosly mistaken to put this amongst the workings of Nature Yet that the course of Natural Causes does prepare the World even to this unmaking of Nature you may find in the last book of my Institutiones Sacrâ— For the proportionable pains the Soul of themselves will cause those as you may see in the same book To fill up here a Page with his own opinion of Purgatory was besides the matter for we doubt not but that he puts more Wilfulness then Wisdom in God Almighty's Actions 4. His main Answer begins N. 3. where he tells us that it is Heresie to make natural causes to have vertue sufficient to bring man by themselves alone to his final end of Eterâ—… Bliss And then he tells you that our prime Argument is the same that Pâ—…gius's to wit that every natural Agent ought to have power given it from the Author of Nature to bring it self to its natural perfection But first I would enquire where â—e sound in any Writing of mine the Proposâ—â—on he condemns If I say that God hâ—th ordain'd second causes to do all effects which are not to be seen to be miraculous do I exclude supernatural causes Are not Christ's coming and Preaching the coming of the Holy Ghost the Habits of Faith Hope and Charity the Prayers and Preaching and good Works proceeding from men thorough such Habits the Sacraments the whole â—orm of the Church all Supernatural causes interwoven with natural To what purpose then doth this man talk that natural causes are not sufficient to bring a man to Heaven Is it not plain he knows neither what I say nor what himself See how just our Argument is the same with the Pelagâ—â—n's Out of this you see his Answer is like to be a good one and so it is For Numb 8. he hath so I answer As man's last 〈◊〉 cannot be reâ—ched by Nature so is it out of the reach of natural causes by their natural operation to chastise man's sinning proportionably to his voluntary acting against his supernatural end My Reply is that he must seek out to whom to answer for I never talked of purely natural causes but natural and supernatural together as they compound all second causes But the good man could think of no supernatural causes but God himself working immediately and so strayed to seek out why such actions were not miraculous which we will not follow him to because it is not concerning to our Theme 5.
yet not those effects which follow the other two parts so that part of the pains remain due after the sin is forgiven and if this had been plainly deliver'd it would have cut off his chief imputation that I say the sin being forgiven there remains no punishment due he was fain to frame such a piece of nonsence as you may see in his third Chapter N. 3. c. 2. This being understood I may proceed to his fourth Chapter in which out of Scripture he pretendeth to prove the deliverableness of souls out of Purgatory before the last day His first proof out of Scripture is to cite Scripture for that in which we both agree to wit that some pains remain due after the sin is remitted So that his argument must be purely out of reason Scripture serving but for a stalking-horse and indeed in this point is utterly unserviceable to him But whencesoever it be drawn let us see the force it carries The Council of Trent accurseth those who say a man cannot satisfie God for temporal punishments due after the sin is remitted by fastings c. where we are to note there is never a word spoken of Purgatory Therfore must he infer to make it carry fully home to his designed point we may satisfie for souls in Purgatory Two things be wanting in this Argument One is some Speech of one Persons satisfying for another for the Councils words seem to be plainly of a man satisfying for his own sins The other is that there is no mention of any satisfaction for the sins of the dead So that the whole Argument is nothing but his own assertion or supposition The rest of his Texts of Scripture are drawn after the same trifling manner having never a word worthy the explicating but their sayings being plainly common to both parties he frames some weak Argument under them the which being out of pure Reason I expect to find hereafter where he pretends to bring Reason for his Opinion 3. In the mean while I may pass to the fifth N. where there comes into play another question For so he argues Christ in his resurrection delivered souls out of Purgatory therefore their acts were changed from acts of grief into acts of joy and this without any change made in Body He proves the Antecedent largely nor will I dispute it with him But the consequence I must utterly deny For both in St. Mat. 27. it is expressed that many rose and came into the holy City and appeared to many And if we do consider that the gifts of God are perfect or as Saint Paul terms it sine poenitentia we will easily see that it cannot be rationally thought that they ever dy'd again specially they rising in glorify'd Bodies for else they would have been publickly seen and not appeared onely to whom they listed Besides that the Union to the Body perfects the very beatifical Vision and if they had dy'd again they should have lost that perfection once possessed If again we consider that no apparent difference is mention'd in Scripture why some should have that bliss and particularly that many should enjoy it and not all we shall find this priviledg fit for all and if for all then that none were changed without some change in their Bodies And that I may not speak this without Authority I call him to witness who was present our Saviour Jesus Christ in the fifth of St. John where he makes mention of two resurrections the one of onely good which he sayes to be at hand the other of all both good and bad which was to come in both which he was to be Judg as he was man 4. He would perswade a man that the position of saying all the Just of the Old Testament rose with our Saviour was so absurd that no man would say it though he had read it in my Book and comes prepared to oppose it which he doth or may do out of divers Histories of the Reliques of some of the Ancient Fathers yet extant or at least found long since our Saviour's Ascension But I wonder that a man of so much Criticism as he either is or I mistook him to be should never consider what the power of History is and what it can witness Take the stories of the invention or translation of the Prophet Samuel History can testify there was carryed from Hierusalem to Constantinople a Body withgreat solemnity That the body was said to be Samuel's and for such presented That it was found in a Tomb which was by some probable tokens held for the same in which Samuel was buried But that the Body was truly Samuel's is beyond the power of History to testify For History can testifie nothing but what men can witness nor men witness more then they can hear or see Nor could it be judged either by eye or ear whether this was the true body of Samuel or no Therefore History cannot assure us of any of the examples which he brings against our position and the truth must be resolved either into probable conjectures or to some obscure revelation neither of which is sufficient to make a Theological Argument 5. Yet because I will not discourage the good man I will pass all his sayings and grant him those he cites were the true Reliques of the Saints whose Bodies they were esteemed Then he triumphs and finds a Saint John who hath two or three heads in the World to have none in Heaven and the Saints who have left their bodies in Earth to have none in Heaven And if I should say they were either replicated or at least by divers Ubications in two places he might easily rap me over the fingers and tell me such solutions are fit for more Metaphysical Schools that look beyond nature and not for me who ought to say no more then I can understand Wherefore keeping my self to Aristotle and Saint Thomas I must declare that the things we call Reliques are not the very Bodies of the Saints but new substances made out of the living bodies of such Saints as much different substantially as if the bodies had been turned into ashes or grass though morally keeping a respect to the Persons whereof they were made Whence it follows that in Heaven the Saints may have the same bodies they had upon Earth though these Reliques remain in the Tombs Peradventure this lesson will seem a hard one to him But let him study well how in Aristotle and Saint Thomas's way there is but one materia prima or pura potentia under all forms and how there is a compound made of this Matter and the Soul without any middle Entity to cement them together he may come to understand this mystery the which I explicate no farther because People for whom Books are printed in English for the most part are not capable to reach and judge such points 6. Here I should have made an end of troubling you with this Chapt. but that I found it
the explication and deduction of my opinion and I do not think my Adversary will quarrel at much of this not that I think them to be his opinions but because partly he knows them to be the opinions of other Divines and partly they are so rational that any sensible man will condemn him at first sight Now therefore it is time to lay down the Adversary's opinion as I apprehend it leaving him all liberty to explicate himself in what I shall miss in at his own pleasure 13. You must know therefore that the Scriptures preach the Doctrin I have lay'd down minutely and Philosophically in few and Metaphorical terms They represent you God like a Man-Law-giver tell you that he hath lay'd up fire for those who will not obey in the next world My Adversaries take this as a word and a blow and conceive that Sin is an Action to which punishment is due of its own nature and that God should not be just if he did not bestow it on the sinner so that they put the relation between sin and punishment and both them to God nor will they hear that this follows out of the Order of Causes which are set for the carrying of Man-kind to Heaven that there may be a proportion natural of the sin and punishment but that God appoints what punishment he thinks best After this they put that the three conditions or names of the Vertue of every Action be three divers Vertues or Qualities whereof one concerns not the other or at least may be separable So that the Action may be meritorious and yet neither impetrate nor satisfy likewise may be impetrative but not satisfactory and may be satisfactory without impetration or merit And hence they say some Saints have had Actions both meritorious and impetrative that satisfy'd for nothing or little because they ow'd little or little pains were due to their offences Whence it comes that there be great heaps of Actions as they are satisfactory lay'd up in the Treasure of the Church and that the Pope hath the power to take what quantity seems to him fitting and to pâ—eâ—ent it to God foâ— the sâ—ns of living or dead and that he is bound to accept of it for the debts or pains of such men or souls whereas my saying is that the abundance of the merits of Christ and the Saints give the Church and the Pope all power and vertue to relaxe sins and punishments alwaies that are for the Churches good This I understand to be the substance of their opinion And now the Reader may be prepared to understand what shall be sayd on both sides SECOND DIVISION Containing an Answer to his seventeenth Chapter That we agree with others in the Torment and disagree onely in the Instrument Ours more connatural and â—it His self-contradiction and false imposing of unheld Doctrin When Baptism remits all pains and how a soul in Purgatory purgeth her self Several petty mistakes No place for merit in the next world That souls in Purgatory are Saints and may be pray'd to The effect of those Prayers which accelerate the day of Judgment Divers intolerable errours and weaknesses in Divinity 1. IN his seventeenth Chapter he professes to shew my Principles to be ill grounded and that there are bad sequels following from them And if that shâ—wing signify no more then saying so I beleeve fully he will do what he promises but if it be taken for proving I doubt he will fall very short of his Title The reason of my suspicion is because I find it so as far as I have hitherto look'd For example the first Principle of mine he makes that the venial affections which mens souls carry into the next world are cause to them of great griefs and torments of mind he farther says I put no other torments in Purgatory but the grief of this affection being joyned to the soul and the privation of bliss And I tell him on the other side that he puts no torments in Purgatory but that I put the very same I confess this proposition is a very bold one for I know not how absurdly he may talk of those pains but in hope he speaks as commonly his fellows do I venture upon this affirmation 2. To make which good I distinguish between the Torment and the Instrument of the torment as to say Burning is the torment Fire the instrument by which the torment is inflicted And then I make this discourse Let him look into the ordinary explication of Divines and see whether they put in Purgatory any other torments then Acts of the will which they call griefs Now the question being of souls in Purgatory that is holy Souls I cannot imagin they will put them to be of other objects then such as deserve grief as of their sins of the want of â—lory and such like Now all these I put in the souls of Purgatory It is clear then then that I put the same torments in Purgatory that he doth not one excepted The difference then is onely that I do not put the same Instruments of torment which he does but I put connatural Instruments he strange and forced Instruments I the nature and eminency of a spirit he a dead body which cannot be imagin'd how it can hurt a soul. Ask which is the stronger Agent and fitter to torment the soul it is clear that her own nature is infinitely more strong infinitely more fit Why then doth not my way satisfy him Because he does not understand that the words of the Scripture are Metaphorical because he understands not what signifies Gods Justice because the Bells ring in his ears that the Councils signify other punishments then their words express He vaunts the Councils be against us but when he declares them he cannot find one word beyond what is common to both opinions 3. In his third and fourth Number he would perswade his Reader that we fall into his own Errour of denying Purgatory because we say these purging torments end not until the day of Judgment and hath not so much reflexion as to remember that there is no place for Purgatory when purging is done As long as we profess Purgatory we must profess not purged This is the Doctrin perpetually before his eyes in the Council of Florence and Pope Benedict and he looks so a squint that he cannot see what is plainly before him that as soon as purging is turned to purged the soul is in bliss About what then doth he quarrel with me because I say the ill affection is in Purgatory all the while the soul is there and yet he says the same Let him reflect upon these his own words N. 4. Whereas Purging cleansing c. signifies the taking away of something which contains the nature of a stain or blemish If this be so then clearly something containing the nature of a stain or blemish is in the soul as long as the soul is in Purgatory Then he unjustly accuses me of saying
so out of the way in the whole that I cannot set him right for he mistakes all and makes no sence of my sayings of this point and corrupts what he cites of other points Therfore I must seek the remedy of desperate evils to cut out all this discourse as incurable until he having read what I have written upon his fifth Number become capable of speaking and hearing fence in this matter THIRD DIVISION Containing an Answer to his Eighteenth Chapter Bellarmin's Errours advantageous to Hereticks The Arguments in the Middle-State from Scripture maintain'd to be solid and the Adversary's mis-interpretations shown weak and inconsistent 1. SO thorough many Brambles we are come to his eighteenth Chapter In the Preface of which he gives me two warnings The first that in reason he should expect some clear demonstration to justify the abandoning the known persuasion of the Church And although I have already justify'd that it is no persuasion of the Church but onely a popular Errour which I forsake yet will I not insist upon that not to make needless repetitions But I must tell him he must not expect to see clear demonstration For that belongs to them that have scientifical eyes and not to them who learn onely to bable of what they understand not A Demonstratour must begin from the first Principles of Philosophy and drive them on to his Conclusion not take up his opinions upon Reasons that fall into his mouth out of the Ayr. What he takes out of Faith he must not be onely able to say the words or cite them out of some good Book but he must be sure to understand them well and see that his Explication contradicts neither Divinity nor any other Science And of these two courses neither he nor his Masters as far as I could see were ever guilty They take Texts and urge the letter without ever penetrating the sense and foregoing all principles they fly at every question with fantastick flashes like Hawks at their prey where ever they spy it 2. His second warning is that my Arguments are the out-casts and refuse of their Authours And I am far from denying it For indiscreet people are as subject to reject the best as the worst and if I be not mistaken in hâ—s Authours they ordinarily chuse the worst Opinions for themselves being men that in Sciences hunt after vanity and the pleasing of the unlearned mustitude and so are fit to make a shew in discourse until the weaker sort be beyond their speculation but never understand things solidly nor are able to give satisfaction to sober Wits who look into the depth of a difficulty He concludes that we never take notice of the Answers so fully made to the Objections we take out of his Authours I will not return this upon him and ask him how many Answers he has read in Religion and Reason and my other Writings which he hath read as appears by the impugning of the Doctrin yet will not cite that he may say he knew not of those Solutions which he impugns not But I will onely say let this encounter betwixt him and me bear testimony how fully and solidly the Answers are made 3. He begins his plea with telling his Reader that I borrowed the first and chiefest Objection from that infamous Heretick Ochinus How does he know this Bellarmin says Ochinus uses this Argument What then therefore I found it either in Bellarmin or Ochinus How proves he that The Spirit with which he writes tells him so And my Spirit tells me that the Spirit which tells him so is the Spirit of Errour and Calumny For when I wrote my Book I had neither Bellarmin nor Ochinus Nor did I ever study Bellarmin so much as to remember such particularities out of him I am not ashamed if I had taken any thing out of Bellarmin to acknowledg it For I acknowledg him to be the best Dictionary of Controversies I have seen but a man must beware how he trusts either his Arguments or Solutions Yet he is very good to suggest to a man occasions and matter that may be well used Neither should I be ashamed to use any Argument I had found in Ochinus or any other Heretick so the Argument be solid to my purpose And it is the prognostick of cosenage in the carriage of the cause to make such exceptions An Argument is good and bad by it self not by his Authour and Aristotle used to find the middle truth by comparing the falsities extreâ—mly opposit and so if I by comparing Ochinus and your Divine should find the truth to ly in the middle I should think my action deserve honour and to be profitable to the Church Let us then look into the Argument it self Ochinus to prove there was no Purgatory argu'd if there be a Purgatory then Souls are delivered before the Day of Judgment by prayers but that is false by the Text alleaged c. Now Bellarmin if he had been a solid answerer would have deny'd his first proposition and told him whether prayers deliver'd them before or not yet Purgatory remain'd safe and Ochinus choak'd that he could not have open'd his mouth and this Answer I have found printed at Rome against the Greek Hereticks 4. This Errour produced a greater to wit that their great Bellarmin was forced to confess that the words of the Scripture as they ly or in the plain sence are false and so he fairly betrayes the Catholick position of Purgatory to set up his own fancy For his solution says that these words If there were no Resurrection signify ' If the soul were not immortal which be so different meanings that by many Philosophers the one was confest and the other deny'd So that the two propositions are neither the same nor such as that their connexion is plainly seen Therfore to make this good he fains a third either falsity or at least not proved nor very probable which is that the writer of the second book of Macchabees wrote after Jonathas his time when by reason of a firm peace the Jews fell to dispute about their Law and so into great divisions and sects Whereas by probability this Book was written in Judas his time For it makes no mention of his death which it had been a fault to leave out if it had passed before the book was written which if it be true these words must not be spoken against any infection of Sadduces but of Greeks who had long domineer'd over Jury specially in Antiochus his time 5. His fourth Errour is that he makes our Saviour also make a false Argument and to conclude the Immortality of the soul in stead of the Resurrection and to make this consequence Abraham and Isaac and Jacob's fouls are alive therefore Abraham and Isaac and Jacob's bodies shall rise again The which would not have silenc'd the Sadduces but rather have made them contemn our Saviour For they better understood Resurrection then the being of an abstracted spirit
Scholaâ—â—cal Doctrin It is likewise to be noted that because the cry of Antiquity is for the day of Judgment it signifies not that some sew shall suffer that fire but that all good and bad better and worse every one shall from that fire reap their deserts the good rewarded the bad damned the middle â—ort purged This solution therefore that some few shall be purged by that fire is excluded by the Universality which because it includes all others good and bad must include likewise the purgable part 3. His first Reply is against my citing Saint Basil and Saint Hierome to explicate the Baptism of fire to be the Fire of Judgment He answers Bellarmin cites these Fathers for the fire of Purgatory Wherein I note two weaknesses the one that he takes Bellarmin to be some Oracle not to be contradicted for otherwise he should have been bound to shew that Bellarmiâ— had done it solidly and not onely that he had done it But the more concerning weakness is that he understands not the question For I also cite this Text for the fire of Purgatory seeing that I say the fire of Judgment is the onely purging fire We are like to have good solutions from this man who marks not what the question is Such a one is that which he cites of Venâ—rable Bede who as far as can be seen in the words says some men explicate Purgatory fire of the tribulations of this life whereof St. Austin is one 4. In his third Number he plays us the like trick For whereas we cite three Fâ—thers not the Scripture he answers what St. Hierom says is the meaning of that place of Scripture which is nothing to our question but what the cited Fathers say whom he turâ—s over with his old song that some shall be purged by that fire without giving any ground out of the Fathers words for it St. Austins Testimonies he here omits peradventure he will remember them afterward He goes on to St. Denys whom I cite to shew that all the good to be expected for the dead was to be expected at the day of Judgment because the prayers for the dead tend to that effect This he cavils at as if I made the consequence that therefore happiness might not be hoped for before whereas I onely say that our intentions are directed to that day as is before explicated 5. I cited farther Origin St. Ambrose St. Hilary Lactantius St. Hierom and Rupertus all most manifestly declaring the trying and purging of the last fire But he hath a salve for all sores to wit Bellarmin says that by the name of fire is understood Gods exact Judgment I wonder a man of his worth can be so silly as to think Bellarmin's ver dict without alleadging other proof must pass for a demonstration The man is one who hath taken much pains and laboured for the Church of God and it grieves me to be forced to diminish any way his credit but this impertinent manner of proceeding obliges me to remember what Possevinus of his own order said of him to wit that Stapleton's solutions were better then his And for the present his solution is particularly absurd out of this head that seeing both these truths are acknowledged that there is at the Judgment-day real fire and district Judgment the one naturally signify'd by the word fire the other improperly where there is no occasion to understand the word improperly it is doubly absurd to take it so both because it violenteth the nature of the word and brings a calumny against the reality of true fire in Judgment and because it makes the speeches of Saints improper without any ground or necessity He cites St. Gregory Nyssâ—â— again but because it is certain his works particularly that which he insists upon are corrupted by the Origenists whose Errour that was which this good Divine offereth us for water of life as is heretofore declared I need not trouble my self about him He takes notice of a place of Origen cited by me in which he says the painâ— of Hel may cleanse him whom the Apostolical Doctrin could not and he says this is Origen's Errour of purging men in Hell after Judgment and I will not peremptorily deny it since it is certain he held that Errour which his followers have sprinkled in St. Nyssen's his work but I may freely say that it is not known out of these words whether it be or no For Origâ—… held the fire which began in Judgment to become afterward the fire of Hell So that the word Gehennae or of Hell must not be explicated of Purgatory but truly of Hell but materially as the fire which will be Hell fire 6. He taxeth another place of Origen N. 6. where Origen says that in the second Resurrection sinners are purged by burning which he says is against us because we say that smarting in fire is punishing not purging which I acknowledg to be very true But Origen says that the fire he speaks of consumes what ever he â—ad of Wood Hay Sâ—ubble and this is plainly purging and as plain saying that the sinner brought this to the second Resurrection After this he brings for himself Origen's known Errour that some are longer others shorter time purging after the Resurrection for that is known to be his meaning 7. Number 7. He explicates those words of Tertullian Modico quoque delicto mora resurrectionis expenso In English Every small fault payd for by the delay of Resurrection That is sayth he in the interval betwixt Death and Resurrection But I would willingly know of him by what Grammar an ablative case govern'd by expenso can signify the same as if the Preposition in were added If it be governed by expenso Mora was that which was weighed against the sin If it be not governed of expenso what is weighed against the sin If it be lawful for him to make new Latin Rules and Phrases to make the Fathers speak for him I do not wonder at his great bragging of his Fathers and Councils For there is no more to be done then to say These words shall signify my opinion as he hath often done already Nor needs he to bring his Examples of in this year For the â—ore is in the Latin which wants an in which he puts in the English example 8. His abusing of Saint Cyprian is much worse whose words he translates so It is one thing to stand before the Tribunal of Mercy for pardon and quite another thing to come presently to Glory It is one thing to be cast into Prison without going thence until the last farthing be payd and quite another thing to receive presently the reward of Faith and Vertue It is one thing by a long grief of torments to be cleansed from their sins and to be purged for a long time by fire and another thing by sufferance to have purged all their sin It is one thing to hang in suspence concerning the sentence of our Lord in the
made in him and not onely concerning merit and demerit Likewise the following words are For such as in that day he departs such in the last day shall he be judged Which sentence plainly says if he dyes impure and deserving to be purged the last day shall find him impure and deserving to be purged what stories soever Bellarmin tells us of another thing 14. There follows â—â—ffinus his Testimony which of it self might have been common to both opinions if it had not clearly alluded to the words of St. Paul which he and Bellarmin with him acknowledge to be spoken of the day of Judgment and which by consequence draw the words of Ruffinus to be meant of the same To Eâ—cheriâ—s Lugdunâ—â—â—is he answers that he hath shewed his words are against us and there where he endeavoured to shew this that is Ch. 7. N. 8. I have answer'd his proof Onely I must note that he cites the words for St. Austin's wheras t' is clear they are not nor that homily of which the one half where these words are is taken out of Eâ—cheriâ—s and therefore the whole Homily must be of an Authour later then St. Eucherius whence his pressing of St. Austin's other places to confirm this is nothing to the purpose 15. He concludes his Chapter with saying there is no one Authority alleadged by which it is made clear that every one though he dy'd never so long since is to be detain'd in Purgatory untill the last day though he had but one Venial sin to answer for In which words there are so many circumstances that it were indeed very hard to find the proposition formally and in terminis in Scripture or Fathers Therefore I deem it enough for me if I find that the faithfull who dy in sin without exception must be purged by the fire of Judgment if I find no mention of any ending of purging but by this fire nay if I find that there is no remission of sin in the next world unless it be at the day of Judgment and finally if I find the whole direction of Scripture and Fathers publickly to be to that day without any mention of any change in the Interim This I think enough for me and plainly enough lay'd down since your Divine hath not given a plausible solution to any one place of Scripture or Father alleadged He confesses the tryall by fire but puts it to be a manifestation against the force of the words without other reason then because it would be against his opinion He confesses the Universal direction to be to the day of Judgment He confesses there is no true Remission of sin in the next world unless it be in the first instant or be as we say with the Fathers in the day of Judgment What can I ask more unless it be how the fire acts upon the good and bad For he not putting it to have this force by preparing their Bodies to Resurrection must of necessity make some fine procession of all who rise thorough this fire and a great discretion in it to know which it must touch and which not and how much every one must suffer and when it will be time to end the dance and tumble with the wicked down to Hell which will make a curious piece to contemplate and so I must expect his farther leasure and prepare my self to his next Chapter FIFTH DIVISION Containing an Answer to his twentieth Chapter Of Vindicative Justice and in what sence 't is transferrible to God His Ignorances and Mistakes of our Dâ—ctrin and Arguments Why Fire cannot be an Instrument to torment Spirits His rare Mystery of surceaâ—ing from Action by pure cessation and of Obediential Power 1. THough his twentieth Chapter bear in the front of its title to answer the objection of Novelty yet it discourseth of other circumstances As that Pope Gregory puts not any to go to Heaven but onely to be delivered out of pains and Venerable Bede the like out of which we do not infer Novelty but Errour and want of Authority in the Revelations they bring For Alcuinus I do not remember I cited him for any such matter but for the opinion it self to be for us Nor do we make this consequence because Abel went not to Heaven therefore others go not now but onely by this example reâ—ute the importunity he makes from the length of Time He says no man can deny that St. Anselm and St. Thomas held this delivery out of Purgatory and brings for witness his first Number of the tenth Chapter where there is nothing but stories written in the two Saints lives which to take for their Authorities is a great mistake For the Authority of those stories belongs to the writers of the lives who how prudent and exact they are and by how many hands they received them are guesses in the ayre I was told within this week a story how the Devil fetcht away a Minister at Zurick It was read me out of a Letter of a man against whom I had no exceptions but because it came thorough more hands neither he to whom it was written nor I could find faith enough to trust it 2. As to his defence that their opinion is not new I remit my self to 〈…〉 Answers in the places he cites that is 〈…〉 Answers of the fifth and sixth Number Chap. 9. his N. 12. Ch. 7. N. 11. and 12. Ch. 5. N. 11. and 12. Ch. 14. And as to his solid Judgment that those proofs are sufficient to make this opinion be defined for an Article of Faith if it be not already as of one side the Church expects no new Faith since the Apostles time so on the otherside what he brings in his fifteenth Chapter is not able to make his opinion as much as probable For the matter being a matter not knowable of his side but by Revelation seeing it depends wholly upon Gods free counsel and will beyond our reach otherwise then by Revelation so it must needs follow that the Verdicts of all men who go not out of solid Revelations are the Verdicts of blind men judging of colours 3. In his second Number he tells his Reader as concerning whether God sets pains purely vindicative that we dressup old Arguments in new Clothes the which I must needs confess to be a custom not onely laudable but necessary For otherwise no Argument that were old could be good whereas experience teaches that oftentimes they are the best and by the regular course of nature they must be so for what is strongest endures the longest But let us look into his process 〈…〉 cites out of the Supplement two Arguments to prove there are no pains in Hell and concludes Thus you see these Arguments do the Devil as good service in taking away Hell as they do our Adversaries to take away our Purgatory So that your Gentleman after he hath spent so large a book to make people believe that the pains of Purgatory are not so great as
the best deeds are in Heaven the worst in Hell neither rewarded His answer is that the time of merit and demerit is passed which is true but nothing to the purpose For nevertheless it quelleth that Principle in common that to every act a proportionable payment is due Therefore the ground of their Doctrin is false and they must make pains due to sins for some farther end that is by rational Revenge not for pure Revenge 8. Number sixth he treats an objection which he mistakes For because in explicating corporal torments we sayd that by diversion they were alleviated or hinder'd as it is written in the life of St. Tâ—… that when his Lâ—â— was to be â—ear'd â—etting himself to study hard he 〈◊〉 not the burning he imagin'd the same to be meant of abstracted spirits and that they could also divert themselves whereas before he acknowledges for my Doctrin that acts are unchangeable in pure Spirits and our of this apprehension he teaches us that some actions are voluntary but not free a Doctrin true but not to the purpose My Argument then is out of the Doctrin of St. Thomas taken by most Divines for an Axiom that the will cannot be forced And the demonstration of it is plain and set down in St. Thomas Because force is against the inclination of the Person or nature forced the Will is the inclination of the person said to be forced therefore the act of the will is still according to the inclination and by consequence never forced This is so plain that every common Divine knows it and yet so mistaken by him that he distinguishes not between doing an outward action at which a Spirit wilfully grieves and the making by force an Action of the will and upon this score sets in array a squadron of places of Scripture to fight against a shadow 9. Number seventh he advances another question to wit why the omnipoteâ—t aâ—… should not haâ—e power by himself or other iâ—strument to make in the soul an afflictive Qâ—â—lity I gave you three answers One for want of a subject for in the Will there can be nothing but voluntary since voluntary signifies no more then the act of mans inclination The second Answer is because there are no such Entities as you call Species or qualities makeable as every one who knows more then trivial Philosophy can tell you And thirdly because God is no hangman but has all nature to serve him when he pleases to punish a creature and defiles not his own hands with such actions He steps on to fire and asks why that cannot torment a soul by some unknown way to us I answer because it cannot burn us for all that put fire put burning but burming seeing it is the dissolution of a thing that has parts cannot by all the Invention he can give to God be in a thing that has no parts therefore fire cannot torment but Metaphorically He says our Arguments have a thousand times been solved but because he takes not the pains to repeat either the Arguments or Solutions I also may pass them in silence Mine be in the eleventh account of my book of the Middle State of souls He may assign the solutions where he pleases Onely to his saying They are solved I must oppose my word that they neither are nor can be to sensible men that have not speculated beyond all reason He objects St. Austin I answer St. Austin affirms nothing of this point but onely presses an Argument of the Unity of the body and soul. I answer Philosophers affirm that Union to be of Actus and Potentia and that such an one cannot be betwixt a Spirit and Fire The meaning of those words and the reason why the same cannot be said of fire here is no place to declare It is enough they are Terms common in the School 10. He proceeds to prove that at least there is corporal fire in Hell because our Saviour shall say to the damned Depart from me you accursed into eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels Another man would have proved out of this place that there was no corporeal fire in Hell For what can be more incongruously taken then to say that one had prepared corporeal fire to punish Spirits withall Wherefore this qualification of prepared for the Devil doth clearly manifest the fire to be spiritual If one who found his Garden dry'd with the hot Sun should send to Londen to buy a Pen-knife to water it withall would not any man that heard it judge him to be mad This sport he makes with God Almighty telling us that when he would punish pure Spirits he took corporeal fire which is far less fit for such an effect then a Pen-knife to water a Gurden And yet Christ expresses that the fire into which the damned were sent was fit to punish Angels that is nothing less then corporeal fire As for his Testimony from the Authour of the Dialogues I hope to have a time to answer it more largely then is here fitting 11. He presses farther St Julian's words that no wise man denies the souls of Reprobates to be detain'd in fire But to have made an Argument he should have added the word corporeal For truly the Scripture so frequently using the word of fire it is not for a good Christian to deny the word which were to affront both the Scriptures and all such as â—se without examination the same words But yet 't is the part of a Divine to admit of the literal word and understand the sense so that it may stand with God's Wisdom As for Bellarmin and Maldonatus's censures of temerity for resisting the consent of School-men I have answered it fully in my MUSCARIUM Ventilatione deciâ—â— to which I remit my Reader For such questions amongst ignorant people are â—ot to be much handled He presses farther how our explication of Torments is not convenient As to that of loss of past pleasures he says their state sets them above it In the which he shews himself ignorant of the nature of material sin for it doth subject the soul to things under its worth and therefore is sin and this subjection is far greater in Hell then in this World As to the delay of future glory he says we forget our selves to make that grieve the Souls since it is but one moment though it were of Millions of Ages Nor can I deny that I forget my self sometimes in speaking truths to them who are not capable of them Therefore I intreat him for the present to put instead of delay the not having of glory and if he pleases he may add while so much time ran for all this he knows to be my constant Doctrin that the Soul knows and grieves for And as for farther explication he himself hath remitted us to his 22. Chapter As for disordinaâ—â— affections remaining he says there are none as he hath proved but we reply'd It was Heresie to put Purgatory without them 12. In